Some of the most important texts of behavioral revolution according to David Easton are as follows: 1. Regularities 2. Verification 3. Techniques 4. Quantification 5. Values 6. Systematisation 7. Pure Science 8. Integration.
If observed properly, some uni-formities in human behaviour can be observed, discovered and found. These uniformities or regularities lead to generalisations or theories to explain human behaviour. Such as, repression causes rebellion everywhere.
These uniformities or generalisations should be valid, which means testable, at least in principle with reference to some relevant behaviour. It should be subject to checking and rechecking.
There are some acceptable, public and standard means and methods for observing, recording and analysing behaviour. They are regarded as methodological techniques, such as sampling, interview, panel studies etc. which should remain available to all. These techniques are continuously reformed and refined to make data of observation more reliable and communicable among scholars.
Uniformities obtained through observation should be precise, definite and measurable for this purpose; they should be quantified or expressed, either in numbers or symbols, as is done in natural sciences.
The behavioural scholar does not start with any preconceived notions, or values because it vitiates his findings. Even if he believes in certain values, he either keeps them separate or announces them beforehand. He remains fully convinced that ultimate values or ends cannot be scientifically proved or disproved as their source of origin, form and ambit cannot be identified empirically. A communalist or a communist cannot, while remaining as such, become a dispassionate political scientist.
There should be close collaboration between theory and research, which are ‘closely interrelated parts of a coherent and orderly body of knowledge’. Research must be theory-oriented, and theory should be well-supported by data. Systematisation means close relationship between theory and data.
7. Pure Science:
Behaviouralists put great emphasis on developing a ‘pure science’ of politics and in conducting basic research. That knowledge alone can be rightly put to the solution of urgent problems of society. Understanding and explanation of political behaviour logically precede its practical application.
It believes in interrelatedness of all social sciences and aims to make Political Science ‘interdisciplinary’. The ‘political man’ can be understood as a whole, by linking him with his other aspects: social, cultural, economic, religious, psychological and historical. Such an outlook is likely to make political studies again a ‘master science’ or an architechtonic discipline.
In this sense, behaviouralism is not merely an ‘approach’, a mere ‘mood’ as Dahl says, or an ordinary reform movement, but ‘a total commitment to the broad and essential requirements of scientific knowledge’. However, Easton’s enunciation of behaviouralism as above involves both its early and later phases. Early behaviouralism neglected values completely, and was individual-oriented. Later, it moved towards macro study and incorporating values as ‘facts’ or ‘givens’.
It would be quite clear that the main characteristic of political behaviouralism is not inherently different from Eastonian explanation. But it includes the perceptual, motivational and attitudinal aspects as well.